It’s a Good Day For Liberty

Years ago in a galaxy far far away, I served on the board of a couple of Second Amendment groups. One of them very much a grassroots group and it was very active in the legislative process and citizen lobbying. Contrary to what people are sometimes lead to think, “lobbyist” is not a dirty word, or a bad thing. Many people have jobs, employers seem to expect that their employees will be at those jobs. So, when there is legislation that matters to gun owners be it a bill to expand gun rights or a bill proposing further infringement of a law-abiding citizens rights with yet another gun control scam disguised as “gun safety” it would seem fair that the law-abiding citizen should also have their voice heard. Ahh, the conundrum. What is the law-abiding citizen to do? They have a job, but they also have rights that need to be defended. Well, the Second Amendment groups in the state went together and hired a lobbyist to be present at the hearings and speak on behalf of the voters that held opinions most firm about further infringement of their G-d given rights, namely self-defense. From time to time the lobbyist would be accompanied to these hearings by the leadership of the Second Amendment rights groups, and I was privileged to be one of those. A citizen lobbyist, who also happened to represent a passel of voters. I had the high heels and a sparkly barrette. I considered these vital, but not as vital as a couple of other things I possessed. A mission, and resolve. I enjoyed this mission, legislators can be quite tasty if bar-b-qued with BBQ sauce. /snark, remember, I’m a vegetarian.

It’s been a while since I’ve attended a rally day. In my state there has been a Second Amendment day at the Capitol for years. Usually towards the end of the season, and usually there is a major bill or two we are wanting big time bad, or a big time bad bill we want to see die an inglorious death. I started going back before my state had concealed carry, the lobby was packed full that day, it was standing room only. For years I went every year, even spoke at a couple of them. The last few years I haven’t made it, for various and sundry reasons. But I’ve made it the last couple of years, and this year was just grand.

I did the hike from the parking lot to the capitol and entered the door to the meeting area. The police were there with the airport style scanning machine. I was met by a young police officer when I placed my purse on the table. He regarded my purse dubiously.

Sir: “Ma’am, are you lawfully carrying concealed?”

Me: Yup

Sir: “I’m going to need a driver’s license and a concealed carry card”.

Me: You are an officer of the law, you should already have these credentials.

After a second for my brain to catch up with my mouth, I grinned at him and said, I’ve got to get them out of my purse, ok?

Sir: “Yep, I have a concealed carry. My friends ask me why I bother and I tell them because it’s the right thing to do.”

Me: I like you, I like the way you think.

He regards the depths of my purse skeptically after he studys my cards.

Sir: “Do you carry in your purse?”

Me: Nope.

Sir: “Good, I worry that if a purse was stolen you’ve now lost your defensive tools.”

Me: Oh I do like you, nope, no purse carry.

Sir: “Which side are you carrying on?”

I answer him, and he tells me after I set off the machine the officer at the other end will wand me. I go through, set off the machine get wanded and I’m good to go. I thank them both for what they do.

I went in, said hi to a lobbyist I’ve worked with, sat with some dear people that I haven’t seen for awhile and listened to some great speakers. The MC is well known in the Second Amendment arena as the guy that wrote the book on gun laws. Which is fair enough, he did write the book on gun laws.

It was interesting, the speakers were great, acoustics are always challenging in that room, but still it was good. Two floors up there was some sort of school event going on. A bunch of school children, I’m guessing pre-teen, or early teens must have disapproved of us being allowed to speak in public. When one of the speakers would start to speak, they would start yelling trying to drown out the speaker. Think there is much indoctrination going on in the tax payer funded schools? I’m telling you, Zehut has the right idea, school vouchers for everyone.

After rally we all split up to go speak with our legislators about the bills we want passed, and I also wanted to mention my extreme aversion to “Guilty until proven innocent” Red Flag gun confiscation. I had mentioned my aversion to my former lobbyist mentor and he said while of course the misogynistic mad mommies are pushing for it, it hasn’t gained traction. Good to hear. I don’t know why mad mommies hate women so much that they want to deprive them of a tool that even elderly women can use to equalize the situation, but they do.

Our MC ended the rally with his trademark line, “It’s a good day for liberty”. He always opened his monthly column with that line. And it was a good day for liberty, every day is a good day for liberty. But we must fight for it, there are forces that will not be happy until they have all the power they want, and as long as there are armed citizens, they know that won’t happen. They use whatever tactics they think will work, whether it is going after politicians sympathetic to us with blatant lies and accusations that their allies in the mainstream media help them spread or lies about “ghost guns” or citizens that defended themselves. Be it vote fraud or illegal immigrants voting, they will use it.

We must remain strong in our convictions and our determination. Where the room was packed a few years ago when we wanted, demanded, concealed carry it was now not as full. Attendance was good, but it needs to be bigger. I saw one old friend, he and his young son were there. This man and his wife want their children to learn about freedom and the legislative process and how the two go together. Those kids have been citizen lobbyists since they were probably 4 or 5 years old. Maybe even younger. The legislators sit up and take notice when large groups of people have taken the day off work and showed up to demand their rights be honored. G-d gives rights, legislators recognize or infringe on them.

My lobbying mission finished, I headed for the exit for the drive home. As I walked by the door to the exit I passed the door you enter, Sir and his partner were still there checking people, I smiled and waved at them and said thank you, they both smiled and waved back. It never hurts for the Second Amendment people to be the nice polite friendly ones.

So if you have a chance, and your state has a rally day yearly, go. See friends, network, make friends, talk to your legislative critters. Don’t let bloombergs paid harpies be the only voice being heard at your capitol.

Tonight starts Pesach, Passover. We each leave our own slavery in Egypt behind. I believe it is a constant process, sometimes easier, sometimes harder. But I don’t want to be one of the Jews that chose to stay behind in Egypt rather than face the unknown. I believe that G-d does want freedom for us. This year is a very meaningful Pesach for me, and I hope that you all will have a very blessed holiday as well. Thank you for being with us, The Zelman Partisans as we travel this path together.

Leaving Egypt and slavery

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My friend used the line “It’s a good day for liberty” to open his columns, I wrote him and told him I was poaching it for a column. He wrote back fried, poached or boiled, if it’s for the cause it should be used.

I always ride for the brand and I always ended my columns with my own sign off.

Let Freedom Ring!

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Poll Tax? Bill of Rights Tax

Chicago Tribune’s Dahleen Glanton has a plan to offset Illinois’ oh-so-expensive violation of Second Amendment rights: Do it even more.

The Second Amendment doesn’t say that gun ownership has to be free of charge
But the freedom to own a firearm doesn’t mean it has to be free of charge. It doesn’t mean that owners can’t be a tiny bit inconvenienced. And someone’s right to own a gun certainly does not trump the safety rights of the rest of us.

Two words: Poll. Tax.

How ’bout charging Chicago South Side would-be voters $250 for voter registration, and making them pay another $100 for a background check?

To paraphrase: But who says that the people who choose to vote shouldn’t have to go into their pocketbooks every now and then? Voters have no problem approving taxes on other people for the latest welfare benefit. But if you ask them to get free voter registration cards they go ballistic. They are perfectly satisfied allowing taxpayers who would never get EBT to supplement the administrative costs for their munchies.

Perhaps $250 for a reporter’s license, and a hundred buck background check for each ill-considered column?

License to practice religion? (Huh; churches are specifically exempted from taxes.)

Hey! You could pay $250 to be free of warrantless searches.

Glanton, peruse the Bill of Rights, and tell us which — other than the Second Amendment — routinely require permission slips and preemptively-prove-your-innocence checks.

Speedy and fair trial license?

Here’s a wild idea. Instead of treating an enumerated right as a privilege to be taxed, stamped, regulated, restricted, folded, spindled, and mutilated — at some cost to government and victim alike — let’s save money — for government and victim alike — by treating the Second Amendment as the right that it is.

The money you save could be better spent on tracking down actual criminals who bypass your permission slips anyway. Of course SA Kim Foxx will probably just let them go, since dealing with real criminals is tough and scary. Honest citizens are easier marks.

[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP and web host bills. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Second Class Citizens?

Over the years, I’ve heard — and made the comment myself — that lawful gun owners are treated like second class citizens: pay for permission to own or carry a gun, banned from stores when carrying, slandered, and subject Jim Crow-style laws telling us to even stay out of parks.

Lately, ex parte protection orders are all the rage, which allow gun owners to be stripped of rights — and guns — without any due process. All it takes is one anonymous complaint that someone feelz someone else might potentially do something in the nebulous future. Maybe.

I stand corrected. We should be so lucky to be second class citizens.

Congolese Migrants Monitored for Ebola Along Texas Border, Says Official
A public health official in Laredo, Texas, said 20 Congolese migrants were monitored for Ebola and other diseases in shelters in his city and across the Mexican border in Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas. Shortly after his announcement during a Laredo City Council meeting, the World Health Organization (WHO) considered declaring a “global emergency” in response to a massive outbreak of Ebola in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

To make this clear, illegal aliens from a country experiencing an uncontrolled ebola outbreak are merely being observed in shelters, instead of being quarantined. A person who has been exposed to ebola can go weeks without showing symptoms, yet still infect others.

Victim disarmers will segregate gun owners from parks and public buildings, but these noncitizens, in the country illegally, who we know came from an area experiencing one of the worst ebola outbreaks in history (not the worst… yet), are not segregated from others.

And given the usual catch & release procedures, they’ll soon be wandering amongst the general American population. Be a damned shame if they go symptomatic the next day, after having infected everyone else — “migrants” and workers alike — in the shelters… who will also be on the loose, asymptomatic, but spreading the disease.

Let’s be clear on this, too. By the official numbers, this ebola outbreak has a 63% fatality rate, and that’s with the vaccine.

But that’s cool, because at least they aren’t evil, law-abiding gun owners. They have rights.

[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP and web host bills. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Put a Price

I have a girlfriend that recently got a e-mail at her job. She works in a very safe, secure building and profession. It’s a gun-free zone. It’s a two story building with lots of great nooks, crannies and places where people could hide. But hey, they do have a armed security guard. One.

She recently got a email talking about the shooting of a healthcare worker in another state and urging people to keep their eyes open, be aware and take the deescalation classes offered. Oh, well, at least there is a sound plan in place. And there is a plan in place. If they can get to a phone, they can have a page sent out warning and letting security know where the problem is. Then everyone is to hide in place and try to protect their patients.

But there is a plan.

Officials say within minutes the suspected gunman was in custody. The hospital immediately issued a code silver and locked down the hospital as law enforcement went door to door to ensure the safety of all patients.

Hospital President Charles Williams gave a statement

“As you can imagine…It’s difficult,” Williams said. “Whenever you have someone of your family, we’re family here it’s tough”

Well, I’m sure that is reassuring to the healthcare worker and their family. Might have given them more of a feeling of warm fuzzy if your facility actually made some policy change that didn’t designate them to being a fish in a barrel wearing the proper color of scrubs. FYI, many hospitals have gone to color coding employees. All nursing wears only X color of scrubs, all lab wears only Y color of scrubs, X-ray wears only Z color of scrubs. Most patients don’t seem to realize what it means, but the hospital feels like it’s “done something” from what I heard.

This is apparently a growing problem.

Healthcare worker injuries

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SC hospital security conversation revived after 2 shootings in 2 days. They are discussing making enhanced penalties for attacks against healthcare workers. That was removed as part of sentencing reform in 2010. I’m sure that schizophrenic, or meth head, or pissed off drunk, abusive but “loving” father who just almost killed his toddler, vengeful ex-louse spouse, upset family member will certainly be deterred by increased penalties. That will no doubt stop them cold. I’m not saying they don’t make sense, they do.

But S.C. Hospital Association spokesman Schipp Ames argues health care facilities are a different working environment than anywhere else.

“They’re open to patients and visitors. We have open facilities people can come in and out of. We have sensitive actions with people,” he said. “Why are we not treating them differently?”

The idea, Ames said, is to put enhanced penalties in hospitals that would establish them as designated safe zones.

I’m saying they won’t make a bit of difference. And, I think there is another element that either isn’t being reported yet, or experienced in the US to the degree it has been in Europistan and Englandistan.

UK next? Doc’s warn AIDS TB and diseases eradicated generations ago brought in by migrants

The female anaesthetist said the German health service has been completely overwhelmed by the influx of Muslim asylum-seekers who are REFUSING to be treated by female medics. …

She also claimed huge numbers of the asylum-seekers have Victorian diseases including TB, which they risk passing on to locals. …

The doctor, who wished to remain anonymous, wrote to the press back home in the Czech Republic to express her shock at the “unsustainable” situation which she says is now affecting the medical care received by taxpaying Germans. She said: “Clinics cannot handle emergencies, so they are starting to send everything to the hospitals….

“Since last weekend, migrants going to the hospitals must be accompanied by police with K-9 units….

“They abandon the children with pharmacy staff with the words: ‘So, cure them here yourselves!’ So the police are not just guarding the clinics and hospitals, but also large pharmacies.”…

In one shocking incident medic also claimed how migrants STABBED the doctors who tried to save a tiny eight-month-old baby which had been “dragged across half of Europe for three months”.

She said: “The child died in two days, despite having received top care at one of the best pediatric clinics in Germany.

“The physician had to undergo surgery and two nurses are laid up in the ICU. Nobody has been punished.

“The local press is forbidden to write about it, so we know about it through email.

“What would have happened to a German if he had stabbed a doctor and nurses with a knife?

But, lest you think that it’s only the stress of being ill or having a sick family member that brings this out.

Migrant Attacks Asylum Centre Employees in Axe Rampage

Then in Multi-cultural Swedenistan there was the 2016 murder of Alexandra Mezher. The Swedes sent a stern message of warning to any other “refugees” that might thing about doing anything like that in the future.

In August, 2016 he was sentenced to psychiatric care, ordered to pay SEK 300,000 in compensation to Mehzer’s family. If discharged he will also be deported and forbidden from returning to Sweden until 2026. After appeal, the court of appeal upheld the sentence, except extending the deportation until 2031.

Yep, he’d be allowed to return. It’s sort of like the laws making attacking a healthcare worker stiffer. Pointless, but we “did something”.

But it’s not just healthcare clinics and hospitals that feel their employees are a dime a dozen and easily replaceable, despite their being “family” and all.

We’ve all read the stories of Pizza drivers, Uber and Lyft drivers that are expected to be easy targets or face the wrath of their employers.

Pizza man saved by gun, but fired for packin’ heat

A pizza deliveryman won’t face charges for fatally shooting a would-be robber several times when he was approached in a high-crime area, but his employer, Pizza Hut, has fired him for violating a company policy against carrying firearms.

And a different Pizza Hut in a different state. Pizza Hut Delivery Driver Fired For Shooting Armed Robber Pizza Hut is being their usual supportive entity for their employee that had a gun put to his head.

“We’re doing all that we can to help him with the transition,” Pizza Hut spokesperson Chris Fuller told the Des Moines Register. The driver, James William Spiers III, was offered two months pay (without tips, naturally) and counseling in exchange for his resignation.

Delivery driver fired after shooting, killing man who attempted to rob him in Beaver Falls

A pizza delivery driver who shot and killed a man who stabbed him during an attempted robbery in Beaver Falls has been fired from his job.

Full disclosure here, I haven’t eaten at a PepsiCo owned joint in years since I found out about their anti-Second Amendment stance. No Taco Smell, No KFC, No Pizza Hut, etc.

But it’s not just pizza delivery drivers that are sitting targets.

Rideshare Driver Who Fired In Self-Defense Now Worried About Losing Job

Security guard ridiculed for pulling gun in defense against two thugs attacking him video in the article. The patrons of McDonald’s that the man is hired to protect clearly side with the thugs who are attempting to beat the stuffing out of him.

Gas station clerk fired for shooting armed robber

Law enforcement sources tell the Problem Solvers surveillance video shows a 14-year-old suspect sticking a gun in the face of the clerk. Moments later the clerk, who has a conceal carry permit, took out his own gun and fired once, hitting the suspect in his stomach.

Nor is it just using a gun that will get you fired.

Do these companies have a right to determine their policies? Certainly. Do they have a right to make a condition of employment that you forfeit your life willingly if attacked a condition of you working for them. Well, I suppose they do. But are those companies and institutions that do this being honest about it? No, no they aren’t. If they were the employment contract would read something along the lines of

In case of emergency, such as being attacked whether by animal or human beast we expect you to willingly leave your spouse alone to raise your children, or in the case of a single parent to leave your children orphans. We expect you to willingly leave your elderly parents grieving the loss of their child and without someone to look after them in their “golden years”. Under no circumstances, and in no way are you to fight back or attempt to preserve your life, or the life of your co-workers or those you take care of, be it school children or patients. But, we will give you two weeks paid vacation, five days of sick time and a mediocre heath-care plan and you can join our credit union.

Naturally the benefits offered would be institution or company specific, but you get the idea.

So, why would it be this way. I suspect it is for the same reasons business have been told by their insurance companies they have to be “gun-free” zones for their insurance. I recently read something that just ticked me right off.

I have been told that many employers ban carry by their employees because they’ve been told that it is less costly to let workers compensation pay for injury or death of the employee than to deal with a lawsuit from someone the employee felt forced to shoot.

All this is because insurance companies want the cheapest way out. Your lives don’t matter to them, your spouse, parents and children don’t matter to them. Remember, the insurance companies supported obamacare.

There are many times I long for a “gun-free zone” liability act. This is one of those time. It’s not that I don’t support the right of a business to make their own policies, I do. I had a conversation with a jeweler one time after I started patronizing his business. At one time he was posted “gun-free” and I wouldn’t go in there. When I noticed the sign was down, I went in to look for a watch band and asked him about it. He said he supported the Second Amendment, he had his CCW and carried, but his insurance company told him he had to do it if he wanted insurance. So how is that giving business owners the right to make their own policies?

Life is precious, even in tough times it can be sweet, there can be good, there can be blessings if we are open to seeing them. That it can be sold out so cheaply by an entity with a bias against it’s preservation by use of an effective tool is just wrong. And it’s evil. That so many young people have been indoctrinated to believe “violence is never the answer” is wrong and evil. Sometimes violence is not only the best answer, it’s the only answer. Because life does matter, don’t ever sell it cheap.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Shaming the Rotters of Reuters

Again

Reuters has a little problem with accuracy, especially when it involves their gun control hobbyhorse.

Swiss set to back tighter gun controls, avoid EU clash: poll
After militants killed scores in Paris and elsewhere in 2015, the EU in 2017 toughened laws against purchasing semi-automatic rifles like the ones used in those attacks, and made it easier to track weapons in national databases.

I asked Reuters, and specifically the author of that article for a reference for that semi-auto claim. Because all the rifles I saw fired in footage from the January Charlie Hebdo and November 2015 attacks were automatic.

No response. From either of them.

So it’s time to shame them again. Last time I did this, it took three tries to persuade them to get the data right.

Let’s look at the French terror attacks.

Charlie Hebdo Attacks

“They were armed with numerous semi-automatic handguns, automatic Kalashnikov rifles, a loaded M42 rocket launcher, 10 Molotov cocktails, 10 smoke grenades, a hand grenade, and 15 sticks of dynamite.”

Automatic rifles. Which I knew from seeing the car machinegunned. Rocket launcher. Grenades. All of which are already banned for French civilians. The only semi-auto were pistols.

“Automatic rifles…”

Even The Telegraph recognized automatic rifles when they saw them.

November Attacks

Weapons:
Tokarev semi-automatic pistol
Skorpion submachine gun
AKS-74?
AK103?

That was an early report, when it wasn’t clear exactly what the murdering scumbags used; just that they were AK-variant assault rifles. And the subgun; automatic.

Later, it got nailed down to specific models.

Specifically, the AK-variants were:
2 Type 56 assault rifle (Chinese AK variant assault rifle)
2 Zastava M70 machine guns (Serbian Ak variant assault rifle)

All automatic AK-variant rifles. Not semi-auto.

So, Reuters and Mr. Shields; would you care to correct the story… and note the correction?

[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs (too late; I sold the truck this afternoon) and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Site Housekeeping

We’ve added some things to our Resources Page, which you ought to check out.

The new items are:

Imaginary Stuff: Things Gun Controllers Think Exist
From Thirty Caliber Clips to Two-Hundred Round Pistol Mags, we’ve tried to list the sillier delusions victim disarmers have used to rationalize more rights infringements. This used to be a subsection of the Gun Culture Primer, but the endless stream of whackyness threatened to take it over entirely, so we gave the stuff a page of its own.

Gun Goofs In the News
Think AR-47.

Rogue Commenters Registry
The specter of false flag commenters posting threats which politicians can use as excuses for action and inaction prompted this listing of rogue commenter usernames and IP addresses.

Of course, the Gun Culture Primer is still there, and continues to be updated as needed. A quick reference for new folks (and reporters who don’t want to end up on the Goofs page), or just a handy cheatsheet when you know something but need a link.

Our Free(dom)Cycle classified ads page is also there, but hasn’t seen much activity of late. Have something you don’t need anymore? Need something you don’t have? This is the place to place a free ad for free stuff.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Advisory: Rogue Commenters Registry

I believe pro-RKBA sites may have a problem. Let’s start with this story from April 6, 2019:

Texas House Speaker declares ‘constitutional carry’ gun bill dead after gun-rights activist shows up at his home
Chris McNutt, executive director of Texas Gun Rights and a supporter of the legislation that would allow Texans to carry firearms without a license, showed up to Bonnen’s home in Lake Jackson on Wednesday to question why the bill had stalled, according to the Dallas Morning News.Bonnen, a Republican, was in the state capital of Austin but his wife teenage sons were inside the home. He said McNutt’s actions were a demonstration of “insanity” and called him an “overzealous advocate for criminals to get a gun.”

Before you jump to conclusions:

“Everyone slammed Chris McNutt of Texas Gun Rights for the fake story of the crazy gun advocate who went to the Texas Speaker’s house. What the news didn’t say was that Chris was posting flyers on the front doors of every house in the neighborhood, and he never stepped foot on Bonnen’s property.” (source)

A Speaker opposed to pro-rights legislation tells a tale of something that never quite happened: an attempted “intimidation,” by omitting key facts and warping the rest. And uses that to rationalize killing the legislation.

That’s from days ago, old news by “Internet time,” so you may be wondering why I bring it up now.

That’s once (that I’m aware of).

That’s bad enough, but 3 days later…

How the ‘open carry’ gun-rights effort in South Carolina shot itself in the foot
The push for open carry gun laws in South Carolina has backfired after one of the bill’s supporters threatened a top state lawmaker.

In response, a state Senate subcommittee chairman postponed Tuesday’s hearing on the bill, effectively killing it for the year by ensuring it misses a Wednesday deadline to pass either the House or the Senate.

Darn those hot-headed Freedom Action Network of South Carolina (warning: Facebook) nutsos; loose cannons. Right?

Not quite.

“This comment was on a Facebook advertisement from an individual who is not associated with our organization. And in fact, nobody here knows who he is. The comments were brought to our attention and we removed them.”

Legislators stalling bill. Mysterious threat from out of nowhere. Polticians and media claim it’s from “one of the bill’s supporters”, but none of the real supporters know who it is, and deleted the “threat.” “Threat” used as an excuse to kill bill.

Twice.

I fully expect to see “enemy action” soon.

It hasn’t happened often, but when The Zelman Partisans see a comment like that, I do delete it. But… I make a permanent record of the comment to include content, username, email address, any link, and originating IP address. Depending on the severity of the offense, I either blacklist the IP immediately or give the person a second chance before banning (the latter in the case of someone who has been a decent participant in the past and may just be having one bad day).

I highly recommend that all pro-freedom site administrators and moderators follow my example.

If anti-rights types are going to make this a standard tactic, it would be helpful to have a list of offenders, where we can share data, and recognize repeat “false flag” operators. Unless/until someone comes up with something better, I offer this page for the purpose. Post a comment with the suspected operator’s info.

Do not doxx.

Keep your own full record, but only post username, originating IP address, site where the comment was posted, and type.

Example:
Username: Red Flagler
IP: 123.456.789.10
Site where posted: www.rights.xx
Type: Death threat to cops
Repeater: Yes. (x times)

I’ll go through comments periodically, and update the main list, wit special attention to repeat IPs. It would help if you’d try to match your offender’s IP to one already listed (control-F search). That’s what “repeater” in the example refers to.


Potential False Flags
Threats, whether vague or specific. Do not include non-threatening racist, antisemitic, or other insults.


Username: Bill Raven
IP: 69.76.5.95
Site where posted: zelmanpartisans.com
Type: Advocated killing judges and DAs
Repeater:

Username: anonymous
IP: 68.135.137.122
Site where posted: zelmanpartisans.com
Type: Threat to kill Jews
Repeater: Yes. (2)

Username: jim
IP: 68.62.176.179, 73.108.192.241
Site where posted: zelmanpartisans.com
Type: Death threats to media & political figures, and other individuals
Repeater: Yes. (6)

Username: Allan (allan112358@protonmail.com)
IP: 138.199.52.197, 138.199.52.197
Site where posted: zelmanpartisans.com
Type: Advocated overthrowing US government and destruction of America
Repeater: Yes. (2 times)


[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs (too late; I’m selling the truck) and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

“Mischaracterizing” Scrutiny

Strict scrutiny” seems to the the latest bugaboo of the victim disarmers, especially in Iowa. It’s been showing up in my 2A firearms news feeds a lot in recent weeks.

And here is a somewhat typical example (and yet, atypical in an important way).

TUESDAY TOPIC: Proposed gun amendment would make Iowa less safe
Strict scrutiny is the most demanding legal standard applied in constitutional cases. It requires judges to assume that a challenged policy is unconstitutional until the state proves otherwise. This legislation provides no exceptions, not even for laws prohibiting gun possession by violent offenders or for criminal laws that enhance sentences for crimes when a firearm is used.

“It requires judges to assume that a challenged policy is unconstitutional”

Unless Iowa has judicial procedures which greatly differ from those of the rest of the country, that appears — to this legal layman — to be a significant… mischaracterization of the meaning of strict scrutiny.

Strict scrutiny does not require a judge to assume a law is unconstitutional until proven otherwise. In fact, no level of scrutiny — intermediate or rational basis review imposes such a requirement.

What strict scrutiny does require is that a judge begin by determining whether a challenged law infringes on a constitutional limit, and — if so — apply a three part test, each of which the law must pass.

  1. It must be justified by a compelling governmental interest, such protecting the public against a specific threat.
  2. The law or policy must be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal or interest, to avoid unnecessary infringements.
  3. The law or policy must be the least restrictive means for achieving that interest: there must not be a less restrictive way to effectively achieve the compelling government interest. Banning an entire class of firearms to prevent crime, when that class is rarely used in crimes, is not the least restrictive.

Basically, need, targeted at the problem, and doesn’t hurt anyone else. Think about that. Do you really want laws that aren’t needed, don’t address the problem, and punish those who aren’t responsible?

Strict scrutiny allows unconstitutional infringements if a judge decides it’s “close enough for government work.”

And that’s strict scrutiny, applied comparatively rarely. Intermediate and rational basis review can allow laws that aren’t needed, don’t address the problem, and punish those who aren’t responsible, which is why people-controlling victim disarmers hate strict scrutiny. Bottaro appears to prefer Intermediate scrutiny, in which restrictions on rights are merely “related” to the supposed need.

Or so I hope. A great many victim disarmers would much prefer presenting a “hypothetical” need.

Personally, I’d prefer another level of scrutiny: Constitutional. The test would be simple.

Does it infringe, even slightly, on an enumerated constitutional provision? If it does, it fails; go get a constitutional amendment. Because… just for example, the Second Amendment does not read “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, unless there is compelling governmental interest to do so.”

If there is a compelling governmental interest which requires going against the Constitution, then there is a compelling governmental interest in presenting Congress and the States with a proposed constitutional amendment.

But I digress.

I said that example from Tim Bottaro is atypical of the “strict scrutiny” columns I’ve seen recently. That’s because the author blurb at the bottom of the column says that Bottaro is an attorney. Unlike the usual MDA/Brady-fed laymen who whine ignorantly about scrutiny, Bottaro should know better. In fact, Jackie Stellish, also writing from Sioux City, seems to have a better grasp of scrutiny than Bottaro. Or is more honest.

I wonder if an attorney so grossly misinforming the public is a matter into which the Iowa State Bar Association might wish to look.

[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs (too late; I’m selling the truck) and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Misplaced Optimism

I wrote last week about the seemingly virtually nonexistent bump-fire ban compliance rate. A commenter spoke at some length on why people aren’t complying. I think he is overly optimistic.

“…99.997% who are well aware of the blatant abuse this nonsense is and will continue to be, not to mention its wholesale uncontsitutionality, and putting their nickel on “the ban can’t stand”,”

Judging by reactions I get, I doubt the number of sensible people is anywhere near 99%. Take this recent comment regarding my compliance rate column:

“I would say this, if I owned a bumpstock. you can have it.. And no, I wan’t no reason to waste ammo. I do not own one. I have belt loops on my pants. Bump stocks be damned. IT WAS JUST A GIMMICK. Let it fade. I like people, the nut job in Vegas, not so much. Think about that, Las Vegas, and there might be a nut job in the mix. Where will I vacation next?”

.

After a year and a half of discussion that person still doesn’t get it. “Let it fade,” and you let all law fade, and we live by royal whim, imperial fiat. “Stroke of the pen” and all that entails.

Nor should anyone who has been paying attention to the courts assume “the ban can’t stand.” Not just the courts hearing the bump-fire cases, which have uniformly stated that the plaintiffs (our side) are unlikely to succeed (with one lone dissent), but other cases: courts finding it unlawful to follow the law as written because a previous president chose to ignore the law, Portland protestors shutting down interstate (and international) coal traffic as the authorities refuse to do anything about it. A judge who found pipeline protestors innocent: “not responsible by reason of necessity”.

The ban well may stand.

“Anyone determined enough to protect his investment AND his rights will have had six months to think and plan slowluy acquire the necessities to ferret their hunk of plastic away somewhere safe and impossible to find.”

Maybe. But how many folks who assumed it would never happen bothered to plan?

“Soom enough BATF will have at least as much egg on their mugs”

Egg in their beer is looking more likely, considering that the DC Appeals court made arguments for the ATF, claims even the feds declined to make, to rationalize upholding the ban.

“HOW can the government of one state order private entities in another state and tell them what they may/mayn’t DO…” the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution prohibits that.

How can the courts rule that “function of the trigger” means volitional movement of a finger? And yet, they have. But I’ll give you a hint how that can happen, although I don’t know if this has been raised in the bizarre NJ case: constructive possession; a California prosecutor could argue that a standard capacity magazine shipped to California remains in the constructive possession of the shipper until it is delivered to the purchaser. Thus, the shipper “possessed” the arbitrarily-unlawful magazine in California, and is subject to their law. Take one look at the Ninth Circus and tell — with a straight face — that they would not buy that legal contortion.

Or the Supreme Court. Remember, these are the judicial gymnasts who, for eighty years, have upheld the National Firearms Act on the grounds that such items can be regulated because they are not militarily useful, but that machineguns can be regulated because they are.

“In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a “shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length” at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.”

Overturning the bump-fire ban is not a slam dunk in an age where the laws is whatever the government says it is today. And remember that the ATF and Courts are both parts of that government.

We are fighting lunatics and liars — DOJ attorneys like Eric Soskin and judges alike — who matter-of-factly state that fingers are triggers, and the only difference between a machinegun and a semi-auto is whether the finger is moved volitionally. (Which, coupled with the concept that a select-fire trigger group is a machinegun itself, makes your finger one such if you are moving it.)

That fight will be long and hard. And expensive. Two of the major groups leading the challenges to the ban are the Firearms Policy Coalition and Gun Owners of America. They can use your support in this.

Donate to Firearms Policy Coalition (and enter to win a SIG P320)

Donate to GOA

(Other groups and individuals raising money to fight the ban can drop a link in comments, and I’ll update this list to include you.)

[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs (too late; I’m selling the truck; contact me if you’re interested in a ’96 Ranger with less than 85K miles)) and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

 


Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Carol Bowne was not available for comment

It’s time to play “Fisk the Bogus Research” again. Today’s offering:

Cooling-off period for handgun purchases save lives, research shows
Malhotra, Michael Luca and Christopher Poliquin authored a study which found that handgun waiting periods reduces gun homicides by 17% and gun suicides by 10%.
[…]
Expanding the waiting period policy to all other US states would prevent an additional 910 gun homicides per year without imposing any restrictions on who can own a gun.

Really? Let’s look at the study.

Waiting period laws that delay the purchase of firearms by a few days reduce gun homicides by roughly 17%

A bold claim. Does their methodology really support it?

the model for gun homicides omits three state-years, and the model for non-gun homicides omits two state years because the death count was zero

We’re done. I’m not not going to do a full fisk on a study where they admit they tossed valid data that didn’t support their conclusions. You don’t omit data because the number is zero. You count the zero. Deliberately omitting zero when computing an “average” will yield a higher average.

1+1+1+1=4. 4/4=1.

0+1+1+1=3 3/4=0.75.

Oh, heck. Let’s look at some other stuff. For instance, they found that firearm waiting periods reduced nonfirearm homicides and suicides (Insignificant, they say, but that they found a definite effect at all should have prompted them to examine it for cause). How, pray tell?

What they also didn’t address is how waiting periods could have such a dramatic effect when roughly 93% of firearms used in murders are obtained through channels which bypass background checks and waiting periods: theft, black market, straw purchases, friends & family, and even “found it at the scene of my crime” (seriously; that’s a fairly common answer in the inmate surveys).

According to the FBI, 10,982 people were murder with firearms in 2017 The CDC says 14,542. If only 7% percent of those murders were committed with firearms subject to checks or waiting periods, we have a possible 769 to 1018 victims who might have benefited from waiting periods. But only if they were killed with firearms obtained no more than three days prior to the murder. But we’ll work with it. Let’s pretend we could have saved 17% as our researchers claim.

That gives us a range of 131 to 173 lives which might’ve been saved. Not the 910 claimed. They’re only off by a factor of 5.26 to 6.95. Truly though, it’s worse than that. 16 states (and DC) have waiting periods. I’d have to sort murders by state to find the fewer who might have benefited.

Hint to researchers using models: If your model doesn’t match reality, change the model, not reality.

[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs (too late; I’m selling the truck) and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.

Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.